-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
My experience taking Tesla to court about FSD
- Thread starter edb49
- Start date
speedyranger74
Member
Correct!
First letter to London, and next day to Manchester. They responded to the London letter.
They have 2 more days to tell me something.
Although I would address it to Tesla Motors Limited rather than Tesla Inc. note the postcode is M11 3DX
speedyranger74
Member
This evening I received the email from Tesla.
How @edb49 said Tesla is denying everything.
I have only one doubt about MVOA: I don't remember to sign such papers, only the ones related to the PCP.
one more thing: Tesla said I did not provided the proof of purchase... unfortunately I don't remeber if was bought from Amazon or Ebay
"Dear Mr Speedyranger
We refer to your Letter Before Claim dated 20 November 2023, which relates to the matter of your Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD (VIN: xxxxxxxxxx) (the "Vehicle").
Please treat this as Tesla's response to your Letter Before Claim in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You should note that if we have not commented on one of the points which you have raised in your Letter Before Claim, that does not mean Tesla accepts your point, and we reserve the right to make further points in due course.
Tesla values its customers highly and is disappointed to have received this letter from you. That said, we reject your alleged claim entirely for the reasons which we have set out below and would ask that you refrain from pursuing it further. Should you continue with your alleged claim, we recommend you seek independent legal advice and representation.
We note that you purchased Full Self-Driving Capability (“FSDC”) on 16 May 2020.
You allege that Tesla is in breach of contract for failing to provide full self-driving ("FSD") as described on Tesla's website. You refer to a statement that two features would be delivered by the end of 2020 and allege that this would be the start of additional capabilities and features, and that FSD would be attainable by the car. You also refer to a video and description which says: "All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances …".
It is your alleged case that in your experience, and based on Tesla's subsequent changes to hardware, this is materially inaccurate because the rear cameras get dirty and the front cameras fog up in cold weather, which allegedly prevent the cameras from working. You therefore allege that Tesla is in breach of contract on the basis that the goods provided do not match their description contrary to s.11(1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ("CRA").
You are therefore seeking a full refund of FSDC under s.19 of the CRA.
As already mentioned, Tesla rejects your threatened claim in full. For the reasons set out below, Tesla does not consider it has in any way mis-led you in respect of your purchase of FSDC or that you have any legal basis for alleging that this feature does not match its description. You therefore have no right to a refund in respect of your purchase of FSDC either under contract, the CRA and/or otherwise.
The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA") which you signed when you purchased your vehicle contains a Governing Law, Integration and Assignment clause which states: " … Prior agreements, oral statements, negotiations, communications or representations about the Vehicle sold under this Agreement are superseded by this Agreement. Terms relating to the purchase not expressly contained herein are not binding … " Tesla will rely on this clause and the MVOA for its full terms and effect. As such, any information on Tesla's website at the time of your purchase does not form part of our agreement with you as to the goods to be provided and their description.
Notwithstanding the above, if and to the extent you can prove the information on Tesla's website did form part of the contract, you are also required to prove that the Vehicle's cameras do not work as described. At present, your allegations appear to be based on nothing more than your subjective opinion. Please provide evidence to support your allegations if you intend to pursue your alleged claim.
In addition, it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that the Vehicle's cameras are able to see the road, for example by keeping them clean. Tesla cannot be held responsible for the state of British roads.
The MVOA also included the term: “Owner’s Manual: You agree to review and understand the Owner’s Manual, which is accessible via your Vehicle’s touchscreen and explains the operation of your Vehicle including applicable options, features and hardware. The Owner’s Manual may be updated and revised as new features for your Vehicle are introduced. You may also obtain a written copy of your Owner’s Manual from us upon request.”
As such you agreed to review the Owner’s Manual, which includes the note within the section “Autopilot”: ”Ensure all cameras and sensors are clean before each drive. See Cleaning Cameras and Sensors for more information. Dirty cameras and sensors, as well as environmental conditions such as rain and faded lane markings, can affect Autopilot performance.” (emphasis added). Accordingly it was made clear to you of the need to clean the cameras and that this would be the customer’s responsibility. We therefore reject your suggestion that the Vehicle was in any way not as described.
Further, Tesla has not indicated that the rear cameras have self-cleaning capabilities. As such, Tesla rejects your suggestion that the Vehicle's cameras and/or its FSD capabilities are not as described. Again, you are required to provide evidence to support your allegations should you continue with your alleged claim.
As to the changes being introduced in HW4, this includes a new version of the cameras and a heating element for the front-facing windscreen cameras. Tesla is entitled to update its software and hardware, and this in no way supports your allegation that earlier iterations are "not as described" or that these were not of satisfactory quality.
Tesla does not accept any of your assertions in respect of an alleged FSD video using HD maps and that this and/or any US court testimony and/or report by Reuters is of any relevance to your alleged claim.
For these reasons, there is no basis on which Tesla is liable to you under the CRA and/or otherwise.
You request a refund of £5,800 which you say is the full price you paid for FSDC, but you have not yet provided any evidence in this regard.
If, however, you succeed in proving a breach of the CRA (which is denied), you would not in any event be entitled to a full refund of the price paid for FSDC as you have clearly had some use of the functionalities complained of. As such, there would need to be a deduction for use which would take account of all used FSDC features (including Autopilot and Enhanced Autopilot, which you have had the benefit of throughout your ownership of the Vehicle).
On any basis, Tesla does not agree that you are entitled to any refund for the reasons which we have outlined above.
For the avoidance of doubt, we do not have a settlement offer to make and would request that you desist from pursuing your alleged claim.
Notwithstanding this, if you do wish to continue with your alleged claim, please direct any further correspondence to our solicitors ([email protected]). You should note, however, that Tesla will defend your alleged claim vigorously.
All of Tesla's rights are fully reserved.
Yours sincerely
xxxxxxxx
Supervisor – Customer Resolutions UK & Ireland
185 Ashton New Road, Manchester, M11 3DX"
How @edb49 said Tesla is denying everything.
I have only one doubt about MVOA: I don't remember to sign such papers, only the ones related to the PCP.
one more thing: Tesla said I did not provided the proof of purchase... unfortunately I don't remeber if was bought from Amazon or Ebay
"Dear Mr Speedyranger
We refer to your Letter Before Claim dated 20 November 2023, which relates to the matter of your Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD (VIN: xxxxxxxxxx) (the "Vehicle").
Please treat this as Tesla's response to your Letter Before Claim in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You should note that if we have not commented on one of the points which you have raised in your Letter Before Claim, that does not mean Tesla accepts your point, and we reserve the right to make further points in due course.
Tesla values its customers highly and is disappointed to have received this letter from you. That said, we reject your alleged claim entirely for the reasons which we have set out below and would ask that you refrain from pursuing it further. Should you continue with your alleged claim, we recommend you seek independent legal advice and representation.
- Background
We note that you purchased Full Self-Driving Capability (“FSDC”) on 16 May 2020.
You allege that Tesla is in breach of contract for failing to provide full self-driving ("FSD") as described on Tesla's website. You refer to a statement that two features would be delivered by the end of 2020 and allege that this would be the start of additional capabilities and features, and that FSD would be attainable by the car. You also refer to a video and description which says: "All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances …".
It is your alleged case that in your experience, and based on Tesla's subsequent changes to hardware, this is materially inaccurate because the rear cameras get dirty and the front cameras fog up in cold weather, which allegedly prevent the cameras from working. You therefore allege that Tesla is in breach of contract on the basis that the goods provided do not match their description contrary to s.11(1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ("CRA").
You are therefore seeking a full refund of FSDC under s.19 of the CRA.
- Liability
As already mentioned, Tesla rejects your threatened claim in full. For the reasons set out below, Tesla does not consider it has in any way mis-led you in respect of your purchase of FSDC or that you have any legal basis for alleging that this feature does not match its description. You therefore have no right to a refund in respect of your purchase of FSDC either under contract, the CRA and/or otherwise.
- The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA")
The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA") which you signed when you purchased your vehicle contains a Governing Law, Integration and Assignment clause which states: " … Prior agreements, oral statements, negotiations, communications or representations about the Vehicle sold under this Agreement are superseded by this Agreement. Terms relating to the purchase not expressly contained herein are not binding … " Tesla will rely on this clause and the MVOA for its full terms and effect. As such, any information on Tesla's website at the time of your purchase does not form part of our agreement with you as to the goods to be provided and their description.
- The cameras
Notwithstanding the above, if and to the extent you can prove the information on Tesla's website did form part of the contract, you are also required to prove that the Vehicle's cameras do not work as described. At present, your allegations appear to be based on nothing more than your subjective opinion. Please provide evidence to support your allegations if you intend to pursue your alleged claim.
In addition, it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that the Vehicle's cameras are able to see the road, for example by keeping them clean. Tesla cannot be held responsible for the state of British roads.
The MVOA also included the term: “Owner’s Manual: You agree to review and understand the Owner’s Manual, which is accessible via your Vehicle’s touchscreen and explains the operation of your Vehicle including applicable options, features and hardware. The Owner’s Manual may be updated and revised as new features for your Vehicle are introduced. You may also obtain a written copy of your Owner’s Manual from us upon request.”
As such you agreed to review the Owner’s Manual, which includes the note within the section “Autopilot”: ”Ensure all cameras and sensors are clean before each drive. See Cleaning Cameras and Sensors for more information. Dirty cameras and sensors, as well as environmental conditions such as rain and faded lane markings, can affect Autopilot performance.” (emphasis added). Accordingly it was made clear to you of the need to clean the cameras and that this would be the customer’s responsibility. We therefore reject your suggestion that the Vehicle was in any way not as described.
Further, Tesla has not indicated that the rear cameras have self-cleaning capabilities. As such, Tesla rejects your suggestion that the Vehicle's cameras and/or its FSD capabilities are not as described. Again, you are required to provide evidence to support your allegations should you continue with your alleged claim.
- Hardware 4.0 ("HW4")
As to the changes being introduced in HW4, this includes a new version of the cameras and a heating element for the front-facing windscreen cameras. Tesla is entitled to update its software and hardware, and this in no way supports your allegation that earlier iterations are "not as described" or that these were not of satisfactory quality.
- Tesla's website
Tesla does not accept any of your assertions in respect of an alleged FSD video using HD maps and that this and/or any US court testimony and/or report by Reuters is of any relevance to your alleged claim.
For these reasons, there is no basis on which Tesla is liable to you under the CRA and/or otherwise.
- Your alleged losses
You request a refund of £5,800 which you say is the full price you paid for FSDC, but you have not yet provided any evidence in this regard.
If, however, you succeed in proving a breach of the CRA (which is denied), you would not in any event be entitled to a full refund of the price paid for FSDC as you have clearly had some use of the functionalities complained of. As such, there would need to be a deduction for use which would take account of all used FSDC features (including Autopilot and Enhanced Autopilot, which you have had the benefit of throughout your ownership of the Vehicle).
On any basis, Tesla does not agree that you are entitled to any refund for the reasons which we have outlined above.
- Next steps
For the avoidance of doubt, we do not have a settlement offer to make and would request that you desist from pursuing your alleged claim.
Notwithstanding this, if you do wish to continue with your alleged claim, please direct any further correspondence to our solicitors ([email protected]). You should note, however, that Tesla will defend your alleged claim vigorously.
All of Tesla's rights are fully reserved.
Yours sincerely
xxxxxxxx
Supervisor – Customer Resolutions UK & Ireland
185 Ashton New Road, Manchester, M11 3DX"
Last edited:
Yes, go to Step 2 please and this was expected response.This evening I received the email from Tesla.
How @edb49 said Tesla is denying everything.
I have only one doubt about MVOA: I don't remember to sign such papers, only the ones related to the PCP.
"Dear Mr Speedyranger
We refer to your Letter Before Claim dated 20 November 2023, which relates to the matter of your Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD (VIN: xxxxxxxxxx) (the "Vehicle").
Please treat this as Tesla's response to your Letter Before Claim in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You should note that if we have not commented on one of the points which you have raised in your Letter Before Claim, that does not mean Tesla accepts your point, and we reserve the right to make further points in due course.
Tesla values its customers highly and is disappointed to have received this letter from you. That said, we reject your alleged claim entirely for the reasons which we have set out below and would ask that you refrain from pursuing it further. Should you continue with your alleged claim, we recommend you seek independent legal advice and representation.
- Background
We note that you purchased Full Self-Driving Capability (“FSDC”) on 16 May 2020.
You allege that Tesla is in breach of contract for failing to provide full self-driving ("FSD") as described on Tesla's website. You refer to a statement that two features would be delivered by the end of 2020 and allege that this would be the start of additional capabilities and features, and that FSD would be attainable by the car. You also refer to a video and description which says: "All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances …".
It is your alleged case that in your experience, and based on Tesla's subsequent changes to hardware, this is materially inaccurate because the rear cameras get dirty and the front cameras fog up in cold weather, which allegedly prevent the cameras from working. You therefore allege that Tesla is in breach of contract on the basis that the goods provided do not match their description contrary to s.11(1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ("CRA").
You are therefore seeking a full refund of FSDC under s.19 of the CRA.
- Liability
As already mentioned, Tesla rejects your threatened claim in full. For the reasons set out below, Tesla does not consider it has in any way mis-led you in respect of your purchase of FSDC or that you have any legal basis for alleging that this feature does not match its description. You therefore have no right to a refund in respect of your purchase of FSDC either under contract, the CRA and/or otherwise.
- The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA")
The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA") which you signed when you purchased your vehicle contains a Governing Law, Integration and Assignment clause which states: " … Prior agreements, oral statements, negotiations, communications or representations about the Vehicle sold under this Agreement are superseded by this Agreement. Terms relating to the purchase not expressly contained herein are not binding … " Tesla will rely on this clause and the MVOA for its full terms and effect. As such, any information on Tesla's website at the time of your purchase does not form part of our agreement with you as to the goods to be provided and their description.
- The cameras
Notwithstanding the above, if and to the extent you can prove the information on Tesla's website did form part of the contract, you are also required to prove that the Vehicle's cameras do not work as described. At present, your allegations appear to be based on nothing more than your subjective opinion. Please provide evidence to support your allegations if you intend to pursue your alleged claim.
In addition, it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that the Vehicle's cameras are able to see the road, for example by keeping them clean. Tesla cannot be held responsible for the state of British roads.
The MVOA also included the term: “Owner’s Manual: You agree to review and understand the Owner’s Manual, which is accessible via your Vehicle’s touchscreen and explains the operation of your Vehicle including applicable options, features and hardware. The Owner’s Manual may be updated and revised as new features for your Vehicle are introduced. You may also obtain a written copy of your Owner’s Manual from us upon request.”
As such you agreed to review the Owner’s Manual, which includes the note within the section “Autopilot”: ”Ensure all cameras and sensors are clean before each drive. See Cleaning Cameras and Sensors for more information. Dirty cameras and sensors, as well as environmental conditions such as rain and faded lane markings, can affect Autopilot performance.” (emphasis added). Accordingly it was made clear to you of the need to clean the cameras and that this would be the customer’s responsibility. We therefore reject your suggestion that the Vehicle was in any way not as described.
Further, Tesla has not indicated that the rear cameras have self-cleaning capabilities. As such, Tesla rejects your suggestion that the Vehicle's cameras and/or its FSD capabilities are not as described. Again, you are required to provide evidence to support your allegations should you continue with your alleged claim.
- Hardware 4.0 ("HW4")
As to the changes being introduced in HW4, this includes a new version of the cameras and a heating element for the front-facing windscreen cameras. Tesla is entitled to update its software and hardware, and this in no way supports your allegation that earlier iterations are "not as described" or that these were not of satisfactory quality.
- Tesla's website
Tesla does not accept any of your assertions in respect of an alleged FSD video using HD maps and that this and/or any US court testimony and/or report by Reuters is of any relevance to your alleged claim.
For these reasons, there is no basis on which Tesla is liable to you under the CRA and/or otherwise.
- Your alleged losses
You request a refund of £5,800 which you say is the full price you paid for FSDC, but you have not yet provided any evidence in this regard.
If, however, you succeed in proving a breach of the CRA (which is denied), you would not in any event be entitled to a full refund of the price paid for FSDC as you have clearly had some use of the functionalities complained of. As such, there would need to be a deduction for use which would take account of all used FSDC features (including Autopilot and Enhanced Autopilot, which you have had the benefit of throughout your ownership of the Vehicle).
On any basis, Tesla does not agree that you are entitled to any refund for the reasons which we have outlined above.
- Next steps
For the avoidance of doubt, we do not have a settlement offer to make and would request that you desist from pursuing your alleged claim.
Notwithstanding this, if you do wish to continue with your alleged claim, please direct any further correspondence to our solicitors ([email protected]). You should note, however, that Tesla will defend your alleged claim vigorously.
All of Tesla's rights are fully reserved.
Yours sincerely
xxxxxxxx
Supervisor – Customer Resolutions UK & Ireland
185 Ashton New Road, Manchester, M11 3DX"
speedyranger74
Member
lol. But but but… you did use Autopilot didn’t you. Limp standard operating procedure. I bet lawyers having to deal with the public rather than other lawyers pains them so much.
So much for Tesla building up a big legal team- they’ve just outsourced this lot.
I can imagine many of these claim are very similar which makes it easy for Tesla to polish their standard reply. Definitely add in your own flair/circumstances/angle if you want the lawyers to earn their money.
The commercial answer will be settle but the strategic Elon (with deep pockets) answer is hell no. Let’s see who’s calling the shots on this stuff. A money person or a man needing to save face.
So much for Tesla building up a big legal team- they’ve just outsourced this lot.
I can imagine many of these claim are very similar which makes it easy for Tesla to polish their standard reply. Definitely add in your own flair/circumstances/angle if you want the lawyers to earn their money.
The commercial answer will be settle but the strategic Elon (with deep pockets) answer is hell no. Let’s see who’s calling the shots on this stuff. A money person or a man needing to save face.
Would anyone engaged in
I've seen this cookie cutter reply many times already, you're just the first person to copy and paste. Doesn't change what the law says though.This evening I received the email from Tesla.
How @edb49 said Tesla is denying everything.
I have only one doubt about MVOA: I don't remember to sign such papers, only the ones related to the PCP.
one more thing: Tesla said I did not provided the proof of purchase... unfortunately I don't remeber if was bought from Amazon or Ebay
"Dear Mr Speedyranger
We refer to your Letter Before Claim dated 20 November 2023, which relates to the matter of your Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD (VIN: xxxxxxxxxx) (the "Vehicle").
Please treat this as Tesla's response to your Letter Before Claim in accordance with the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. You should note that if we have not commented on one of the points which you have raised in your Letter Before Claim, that does not mean Tesla accepts your point, and we reserve the right to make further points in due course.
Tesla values its customers highly and is disappointed to have received this letter from you. That said, we reject your alleged claim entirely for the reasons which we have set out below and would ask that you refrain from pursuing it further. Should you continue with your alleged claim, we recommend you seek independent legal advice and representation.
- Background
We note that you purchased Full Self-Driving Capability (“FSDC”) on 16 May 2020.
You allege that Tesla is in breach of contract for failing to provide full self-driving ("FSD") as described on Tesla's website. You refer to a statement that two features would be delivered by the end of 2020 and allege that this would be the start of additional capabilities and features, and that FSD would be attainable by the car. You also refer to a video and description which says: "All Tesla vehicles have the hardware needed in the future for full self-driving in almost all circumstances …".
It is your alleged case that in your experience, and based on Tesla's subsequent changes to hardware, this is materially inaccurate because the rear cameras get dirty and the front cameras fog up in cold weather, which allegedly prevent the cameras from working. You therefore allege that Tesla is in breach of contract on the basis that the goods provided do not match their description contrary to s.11(1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ("CRA").
You are therefore seeking a full refund of FSDC under s.19 of the CRA.
- Liability
As already mentioned, Tesla rejects your threatened claim in full. For the reasons set out below, Tesla does not consider it has in any way mis-led you in respect of your purchase of FSDC or that you have any legal basis for alleging that this feature does not match its description. You therefore have no right to a refund in respect of your purchase of FSDC either under contract, the CRA and/or otherwise.
- The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA")
The Motor Vehicle Order Agreement ("MVOA") which you signed when you purchased your vehicle contains a Governing Law, Integration and Assignment clause which states: " … Prior agreements, oral statements, negotiations, communications or representations about the Vehicle sold under this Agreement are superseded by this Agreement. Terms relating to the purchase not expressly contained herein are not binding … " Tesla will rely on this clause and the MVOA for its full terms and effect. As such, any information on Tesla's website at the time of your purchase does not form part of our agreement with you as to the goods to be provided and their description.
- The cameras
Notwithstanding the above, if and to the extent you can prove the information on Tesla's website did form part of the contract, you are also required to prove that the Vehicle's cameras do not work as described. At present, your allegations appear to be based on nothing more than your subjective opinion. Please provide evidence to support your allegations if you intend to pursue your alleged claim.
In addition, it is the driver’s responsibility to ensure that the Vehicle's cameras are able to see the road, for example by keeping them clean. Tesla cannot be held responsible for the state of British roads.
The MVOA also included the term: “Owner’s Manual: You agree to review and understand the Owner’s Manual, which is accessible via your Vehicle’s touchscreen and explains the operation of your Vehicle including applicable options, features and hardware. The Owner’s Manual may be updated and revised as new features for your Vehicle are introduced. You may also obtain a written copy of your Owner’s Manual from us upon request.”
As such you agreed to review the Owner’s Manual, which includes the note within the section “Autopilot”: ”Ensure all cameras and sensors are clean before each drive. See Cleaning Cameras and Sensors for more information. Dirty cameras and sensors, as well as environmental conditions such as rain and faded lane markings, can affect Autopilot performance.” (emphasis added). Accordingly it was made clear to you of the need to clean the cameras and that this would be the customer’s responsibility. We therefore reject your suggestion that the Vehicle was in any way not as described.
Further, Tesla has not indicated that the rear cameras have self-cleaning capabilities. As such, Tesla rejects your suggestion that the Vehicle's cameras and/or its FSD capabilities are not as described. Again, you are required to provide evidence to support your allegations should you continue with your alleged claim.
- Hardware 4.0 ("HW4")
As to the changes being introduced in HW4, this includes a new version of the cameras and a heating element for the front-facing windscreen cameras. Tesla is entitled to update its software and hardware, and this in no way supports your allegation that earlier iterations are "not as described" or that these were not of satisfactory quality.
- Tesla's website
Tesla does not accept any of your assertions in respect of an alleged FSD video using HD maps and that this and/or any US court testimony and/or report by Reuters is of any relevance to your alleged claim.
For these reasons, there is no basis on which Tesla is liable to you under the CRA and/or otherwise.
- Your alleged losses
You request a refund of £5,800 which you say is the full price you paid for FSDC, but you have not yet provided any evidence in this regard.
If, however, you succeed in proving a breach of the CRA (which is denied), you would not in any event be entitled to a full refund of the price paid for FSDC as you have clearly had some use of the functionalities complained of. As such, there would need to be a deduction for use which would take account of all used FSDC features (including Autopilot and Enhanced Autopilot, which you have had the benefit of throughout your ownership of the Vehicle).
On any basis, Tesla does not agree that you are entitled to any refund for the reasons which we have outlined above.
- Next steps
For the avoidance of doubt, we do not have a settlement offer to make and would request that you desist from pursuing your alleged claim.
Notwithstanding this, if you do wish to continue with your alleged claim, please direct any further correspondence to our solicitors ([email protected]). You should note, however, that Tesla will defend your alleged claim vigorously.
All of Tesla's rights are fully reserved.
Yours sincerely
xxxxxxxx
Supervisor – Customer Resolutions UK & Ireland
185 Ashton New Road, Manchester, M11 3DX"
I expect to get an identical response, albeit via mail (why are they emailing you?)
Also lol that they’re inviting you to communicate directly with their solicitors. To what end? So they can make all kinds of portentous threats outside of the formal claim process?
Also lol that they’re inviting you to communicate directly with their solicitors. To what end? So they can make all kinds of portentous threats outside of the formal claim process?
MrBadger
Badger out
That response shows utter contempt for customers and UK consumer law.
If it was me, I would look at challenging the fairness of the contract too. It would be funny if they threw that one back at you in the same way which would prove how one sided their contract is, ie likely breaches unfair contracts legislation.
And just to reiterate what I have said before. Many solicitors give 30 minutes free legal advice and many home, car and breakdown insurance policies come with legal cover.
If it was me, I would look at challenging the fairness of the contract too. It would be funny if they threw that one back at you in the same way which would prove how one sided their contract is, ie likely breaches unfair contracts legislation.
And just to reiterate what I have said before. Many solicitors give 30 minutes free legal advice and many home, car and breakdown insurance policies come with legal cover.
Re the home, car and breakdown policy legal cover -- I have seen this mentioned before but not sure it is meant for these kinds of claims.
It is quite possible that Tesla reads the on-line forums. My supposition as a reader of this thread in particular is that Tesla is well aware of a potential avalanche of claims should more reports be posted of success. It comes as no surprise that they will be aggressive to forestall that. And farming it out to a reputable law firm is sensible for them as well. I am not defending Tesla's position at all, just giving my view of why I believe they will fight these claims vigorously.
Tesla can monitor your car, know where you are & know that you are picking your nose in your car. But they need evidence that you bought FSD at full price, which is a software download!
"Slaps forehead"
X% won't raise a case
Y% will be put off by Tesla's legal tactics
Z% will win a claim
It's little surprise Tesla will try to keep the value of Z as low as possible. If new FSD buyers > Z% then Tesla are quids in.
Y% will be put off by Tesla's legal tactics
Z% will win a claim
It's little surprise Tesla will try to keep the value of Z as low as possible. If new FSD buyers > Z% then Tesla are quids in.
Tesla seem to be leaning quite heavily on this from the FSD page...
"The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates."
"The currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous. The activation and use of these features are dependent on achieving reliability far in excess of human drivers as demonstrated by billions of miles of experience, as well as regulatory approval, which may take longer in some jurisdictions. As these self-driving features evolve, your car will be continuously upgraded through over-the-air software updates."
On the face of it the caveat stated appears fair enough- stuff outside of Tesla’s control. But it isn’t reasonable to take money for something you believe (or know) wouldn’t be delivered with the lifetime of average ownership or for an indeterminate period of time. Unfair contract term. Tesla has expert knowledge here that most consumers don’t. I’ll sell you a seat on a rocket to Mars for £10k but conditional on the regulators approving standards for consumer space travel seat sizing. It’s not never ;-)
Similar threads
